What’s in a name: Indian, Hind Or Hindi?

By Ashok Vohra

Zohran Mamdani, the first person of Indian origin to be elected as mayor of New York, in his victory speech, quoting Jawaharlal Nehru’s famous ‘Tryst with Destiny’ speech, categorically expressed his commitment to reject the western paradigm of power politics and promote transformative and positive social action – a typically Indian notion.

According to Jawaharlal Nehru, the correct term to refer to everything commonly termed as ‘Indian’ is the word ‘Hind’, or ‘Hindi’, which is the shortened form of ‘Hindustani’. He upheld that “In the countries of Western Asia, in Iran and Turkey, in Iraq, Afghanistan, Egypt, and elsewhere, India has always been referred to and is still called Hind; and everything Indian is called Hindi.” In US and Europe, the relatively recent term ‘Indian’ is used to refer to our country, its culture, or the historical continuity of our varied traditions.

The advantage of using the terms ‘Hind’ or ‘Hindi’, Nehru argued, was that this usage was a-religious, that is, it had nothing to do with religion. A Muslim or a Christian can be as much a ‘Hind’ or ‘Hindi’ as persons who follow Hinduism. However, he was fully aware thatthe word ‘Hindi’ has become associated in India with a particular script – the Devanagari script of Sanskrit – and so it has become difficult to use it in its larger and more natural significance. He hoped that “when present-day controversies subside, we may revert to its original and more satisfying use.”

Nehru realised that modern science does not help in moments of existential crisis, when we are faced with real-life dilemmas; “when we are tortured by the conflict of duties.” It is because Science explains phenomena in the material world and tells us nothing about the purpose and meaning of life.

A study of the humanities in general and philosophy in particular enlightens us about the crisis we face in our political, social, religious, and economic spheres, especially in our spiritual lives. Nehru regarded ‘Hind or Hindi’ thinking as much superior to philosophies that originated in other parts of the world. So, Nehru was very curious to find out the nature and scope of ‘Hind or Hindi’ culture, religion, philosophy, metaphysics, mysticism and spirituality.

In his Discovery of India , Nehru categorically wrote, “If i were asked under what sky the human mind has most fully developed some of its choicest gifts, has most deeply pondered over the greatest problems of life, and has found solutions of some of them which well deserve the attention even of those who have studied Plato and Kant – i should point to India.” He upheld that Indian philosophy is living philosophy as it “answers the problems of today”.

Nehru was deeply influenced by writings of Bertrand Russell, Lenin, and also GM Trevelyan’s Garibaldi books. He was also impressed by the apparent material achievements of Western nations, especially Soviet Union and Europe. Thus convinced, he developed a rationalist, materialist, and humanist mindset. Nehru’s rationalistic thinking outrightly rejected revelation as the source of religion. This thinking, in combination with his observation of religious practices, led him to conclude that religion inevitably results in superstitions, belief in the supernatural, bigotry, exploitation and preservation of vested interests, prejudice and dogmatic beliefs.

Nehru argued that people “who are slaves to dogma and dogmatic mentality cannot progress”. Nehru ardently believed in promoting scientific temper, modern education, and industrialisation.

END OF ARTICLE